|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 24, 2020 23:42:00 GMT 1
Disney+ allows Marvel Studios to operate outside of four quadrant filmmaking strictures. WandaVision is a high concept show. I don't think they would have gambled on that idea working in theaters (despite Olsen's wild popularity). And with subscriptions supporting up to five separate users, paying the "exorbitant" cost becomes mostly irrelevant. The only objectively bad move they've made with the service is trying to extract a surcharge from subscribers for watching Mulan. Yes, I absolutely subscribe to the concept that then can do more with these shows than traditional cinema can offer. Shows are often burdened by lower budgets, but that isn’t the case heres, so what we’re getting is a truly expanded experience, and not a case where the shows are just superfluous side fare that doesn’t truly matter. This will matter and it will be high quality. Regarding the Mulan surcharge, I define it as a test that didn’t work out. It’s hard to put a movie out there you spent $200,000 without trying to charge for at least the theater revenue you would have earned, and I stand behind them that $30 represents a reasonable attempt to average what families of 2-4 would have paid. If they couldn’t generate more subscribers, then it really was the only sensible move. Do you know if Mulan was available to all profiles under a single Disney+ account? Also, was there a time limit on viewing the film? Both of those factors would make a world of difference in regards to the value proposition. WB is removing films like Wonder Woman 84 after 30 days, and that's BS to me.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Dec 24, 2020 23:47:32 GMT 1
I still stand with my pov that they tested with the wrong movie. Black Widow has a 200 million dollar budget. With a 30 buck Premier Access fee they would have needed 7 million subscribers to do it and they would have broken even. Im 100% sure Black Widow would have had much more people paying it than Mulan. Black Widow is MCU, the biggest franchise in the world. Mulan was a controversial film and a Disney Live remake which arent too popular anyway.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA KEN! on Dec 24, 2020 23:52:29 GMT 1
I still stand with my pov that they tested with the wrong movie. Black Widow has a 200 million dollar budget. With a 30 buck Premier Access fee they would have needed 7 million subscribers to do it and they would have broken even. Im 100% sure Black Widow would have had much more people paying it than Mulan. Black Widow is MCU, the biggest franchise in the world. Mulan was a controversial film and a Disney Live remake which arent too popular anyway. Yeah it should have been Black Widow that gotten a premium release. Mulan, controversy aside, was already bashed film after the teaser came out. Besides why pay $30 for a remake when you can watch the original at no additional cost.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2020 23:52:42 GMT 1
Disney+ allows Marvel Studios to operate outside of four quadrant filmmaking strictures. WandaVision is a high concept show. I don't think they would have gambled on that idea working in theaters (despite Olsen's wild popularity). And with subscriptions supporting up to five separate users, paying the "exorbitant" cost becomes mostly irrelevant. The only objectively bad move they've made with the service is trying to extract a surcharge from subscribers for watching Mulan. Yes, I absolutely subscribe to the concept that then can do more with these shows than traditional cinema can offer. Shows are often burdened by lower budgets, but that isn’t the case heres, so what we’re getting is a truly expanded experience, and not a case where the shows are just superfluous side fare that doesn’t truly matter. This will matter and it will be high quality. Regarding the Mulan surcharge, I define it as a test that didn’t work out. It’s hard to put a movie out there you spent $200,000 without trying to charge for at least the theater revenue you would have earned, and I stand behind them that $30 represents a reasonable attempt to average what families of 2-4 would have paid. If they couldn’t generate more subscribers, then it really was the only sensible move. ArArArchStanton @weirdraptor Would you say it’s unfair to question this model as a whole? Or is it completely out of bounds to suggest that the shows are optional for fans who don’t care about them? It’s a sentiment shared by many MCU fans right now. I recall a guy not too long ago who freaked out and put me on his ignore list for suggesting such a thing.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Dec 24, 2020 23:55:20 GMT 1
I still stand with my pov that they tested with the wrong movie. Black Widow has a 200 million dollar budget. With a 30 buck Premier Access fee they would have needed 7 million subscribers to do it and they would have broken even. Im 100% sure Black Widow would have had much more people paying it than Mulan. Black Widow is MCU, the biggest franchise in the world. Mulan was a controversial film and a Disney Live remake which arent too popular anyway. Yeah it should have been Black Widow that gotten a premium release. Mulan, controversy aside, was already bashed film after the teaser came out. Besides why pay $30 for a remake when you can watch the original at no additional cost. We did that quick poll on the podcast. No-one wanted to pay for Mulan. Everyone wanted to pay for Black Widow. We cant be the only ones who think like that.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 24, 2020 23:57:17 GMT 1
I still stand with my pov that they tested with the wrong movie. Black Widow has a 200 million dollar budget. With a 30 buck Premier Access fee they would have needed 7 million subscribers to do it and they would have broken even. Im 100% sure Black Widow would have had much more people paying it than Mulan. Black Widow is MCU, the biggest franchise in the world. Mulan was a controversial film and a Disney Live remake which arent too popular anyway. Yes but, Black Widow fans have been waiting for a theatrical release for ages. For purely selfish reasons, I'm glad it never went to Disney+. I'll be disappointed if it does in the future. I'd rather see it fail in theaters, honestly.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA KEN! on Dec 24, 2020 23:57:44 GMT 1
Yeah it should have been Black Widow that gotten a premium release. Mulan, controversy aside, was already bashed film after the teaser came out. Besides why pay $30 for a remake when you can watch the original at no additional cost. We did that quick poll on the podcast. No-one wanted to pay for Mulan. Everyone wanted to pay for Black Widow. We cant be the only ones who think like that. That was the popular opinion on Reddit as well during the discussion of doing a premium release of Black Widow.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Dec 24, 2020 23:59:55 GMT 1
I still stand with my pov that they tested with the wrong movie. Black Widow has a 200 million dollar budget. With a 30 buck Premier Access fee they would have needed 7 million subscribers to do it and they would have broken even. Im 100% sure Black Widow would have had much more people paying it than Mulan. Black Widow is MCU, the biggest franchise in the world. Mulan was a controversial film and a Disney Live remake which arent too popular anyway. Yes but, Black Widow fans have been waiting for a theatrical release for ages. For purely selfish reasons, I'm glad it never went to Disney+. I'll be disappointed if it does in the future. I'd rather see it fail in theaters, honestly. I understand and share your sentiment. I was just talking what would have worked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 0:00:51 GMT 1
Yes but, Black Widow fans have been waiting for a theatrical release for ages. For purely selfish reasons, I'm glad it never went to Disney+. I'll be disappointed if it does in the future. I'd rather see it fail in theaters, honestly. I understand and share your sentiment. I was just talking what would have worked. Why would you want to see it FAIL in theaters? That boggles the mind honestly.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 0:05:41 GMT 1
Yes but, Black Widow fans have been waiting for a theatrical release for ages. For purely selfish reasons, I'm glad it never went to Disney+. I'll be disappointed if it does in the future. I'd rather see it fail in theaters, honestly. I understand and share your sentiment. I was just talking what would have worked. Yeah, I totally get that, and I could agree if not for the emotional conflict in me. My feelings are completely irrational and have little to do with good business practice. Disney, obey me!
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Dec 25, 2020 0:11:21 GMT 1
I understand and share your sentiment. I was just talking what would have worked. Why would you want to see it FAIL in theaters? That boggles the mind honestly. Oh I dont want to see it fail. I mean Black Widow deserves its run in theaters. And with Covid it may mean it will 'fail'. But if I had to choose I prefer to see the movies in the theater than I would only on Disney+/Home Release.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 0:14:12 GMT 1
Why would you want to see it FAIL in theaters? That boggles the mind honestly. Oh I dont want to see it fail. I mean Black Widow deserves its run in theaters. And with Covid it may mean it will 'fail'. But if I had to choose I prefer to see the movies in the theater than I would only on Disney+/Home Release. That makes sense. The post you quoted though mentioned actively wanting it fail. I thought you were agreeing with that and it surprised me.
|
|
|
Post by Grandmaster on Dec 25, 2020 0:16:17 GMT 1
Oh I dont want to see it fail. I mean Black Widow deserves its run in theaters. And with Covid it may mean it will 'fail'. But if I had to choose I prefer to see the movies in the theater than I would only on Disney+/Home Release. That makes sense. The post you quoted though mentioned actively wanting it fail. I thought you were agreeing with that and it surprised me. No its pure the I want it in theaters thing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 0:32:45 GMT 1
Yes, I absolutely subscribe to the concept that then can do more with these shows than traditional cinema can offer. Shows are often burdened by lower budgets, but that isn’t the case heres, so what we’re getting is a truly expanded experience, and not a case where the shows are just superfluous side fare that doesn’t truly matter. This will matter and it will be high quality. Regarding the Mulan surcharge, I define it as a test that didn’t work out. It’s hard to put a movie out there you spent $200,000 without trying to charge for at least the theater revenue you would have earned, and I stand behind them that $30 represents a reasonable attempt to average what families of 2-4 would have paid. If they couldn’t generate more subscribers, then it really was the only sensible move. ArArArchStanton @weirdraptor Would you say it’s unfair to question this model as a whole? Or is it completely out of bounds to suggest that the shows are optional for fans who don’t care about them? It’s a sentiment shared by many MCU fans right now. I recall a guy not too long ago who freaked out and put me on his ignore list for suggesting such a thing. It's totally okay to question a new model. We don't know how well it'll work yet.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Dec 25, 2020 0:52:20 GMT 1
Oh I think they're going to have big ties. IMO these are the films, just 8 hour films telling character specific stories. They're one in the same to me. Some will be more one and done, but others will be almost vital lead ins to larger stories, and onboarding vehicles for new characters. I can't speak for Raptor, but this is more than I ever hoped for. It's the peak of the series I believe That’s cool. And the series are there for you to enjoy. As for me, I’m perfectly happy just enjoying the movies. I just can’t see any of these shows as vital because if not for the service they wouldn’t exist. All of the A Listers are still getting movies. To me that’s proof that the shows are supplementary, not core. I do get that, and if it helps, the idea is that core is whatever you want it to be. If you were reading comics, the shows are like subscribing to Captain America or Iron Man. If those individual stories are what the core is to you, then that’s where you’ll find stories that expand beyond a 2 hour film format. But if you are a reader who just likes the larger events, those are what the movies are. The core is whatever you want to focus on, and they’re all part of a larger picture
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 1:39:24 GMT 1
That’s cool. And the series are there for you to enjoy. As for me, I’m perfectly happy just enjoying the movies. I just can’t see any of these shows as vital because if not for the service they wouldn’t exist. All of the A Listers are still getting movies. To me that’s proof that the shows are supplementary, not core. I do get that, and if it helps, the idea is that core is whatever you want it to be. If you were reading comics, the shows are like subscribing to Captain America or Iron Man. If those individual stories are what the core is to you, then that’s where you’ll find stories that expand beyond a 2 hour film format. But if you are a reader who just likes the larger events, those are what the movies are. The core is whatever you want to focus on, and they’re all part of a larger picture Basically. I will probably watch Wanda if it’s good. Loki looks fun, though he’s alt universe Loki so I doubt it’s really tied to any MCU narratives. I’m not sure I really care at all about the teen girl heroes. Call me a sexist, but I just don’t get the appeal. Aside from SQUIRREL GIRL, that is. But she’s not there yet. So if they are actually important to the larger MCU then I’m not sure the future of the MCU is for me. But I will believe that when I see it. Anyway, Merry XMas, Archie! Enjoy WW tomorrow. (If you can. )
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 2:01:57 GMT 1
ArArArchStanton @weirdraptor Would you say it’s unfair to question this model as a whole? Or is it completely out of bounds to suggest that the shows are optional for fans who don’t care about them? It’s a sentiment shared by many MCU fans right now. I recall a guy not too long ago who freaked out and put me on his ignore list for suggesting such a thing. It's totally okay to question a new model. We don't know how well it'll work yet. Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 2:06:38 GMT 1
It's totally okay to question a new model. We don't know how well it'll work yet. Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model. But Star Trek never tried to tell different chapters of the same story across a TV show and a movie. They always told their own stories just happened to be in the same setting. Wandavision and Doctor Strange 2 are different parts of the same story, and not everyone is going to want to be forced to subscribe to Disney+.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 2:24:18 GMT 1
Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model. But Star Trek never tried to tell different chapters of the same story across a TV show and a movie. They always told their own stories just happened to be in the same setting. Wandavision and Doctor Strange 2 are different parts of the same story, and not everyone is going to want to be forced to subscribe to Disney+. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 2:26:16 GMT 1
Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model. But Star Trek never tried to tell different chapters of the same story across a TV show and a movie. They always told their own stories just happened to be in the same setting. Wandavision and Doctor Strange 2 are different parts of the same story, and not everyone is going to want to be forced to subscribe to Disney+. But the idea isn't strictly new is it? It's an evolved version of an existing idea. I doubt the series and movie tie-ins will be as crucial as some are making it out to be. If you bought the eight-issue Secret Invasion comic book series, you didn't need to buy the 48 tie-in issues that accompanied it. Your participation in tie-in issues was based on your affinity for the featured character(s). Conversely, if you weren't interested in the main series, and you saw your favorite book suddenly branded as a "Secret Invasion" tie-in for a month, it didn't amount to much more than a hiccup in following the series. The Disney+ series is an enticement; they're not going to be mandatory. If you're a devout follower and have the disposable income to pay for the extra content, it's there for you. If you're more casual or a pick-and-choose type of fan, then enjoy the theatrical releases and that experience. If you don't want to subscribe, but you still feel FOMO, I wouldn't know how to address that circumstance other than to wish you luck. Movies take a while to be produced and to be released. The process takes years. I don't think it's unreasonable of Disney to want to fill in that gap with additional optional content. It keeps fans, who mostly tent to be impatient, engaged. MCU Phase four is clearly moving away from the cohesive narrative through-lines that popularized early phases. I, personally, just don't see this as a BIG issue or a hanging offense.
|
|
|
Post by ArArArchStanton on Dec 25, 2020 3:22:22 GMT 1
It's totally okay to question a new model. We don't know how well it'll work yet. Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model. I keep framing it as just like the comics There are events, and there individual series. It’s all about reading/watching what you find important, not just thinking the films are most important because they’re types of things have mostly only been taken seriously on film. What they’re doing goes beyond preconceived notions that TV is some lesser cousin to the films.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 3:31:38 GMT 1
But Star Trek never tried to tell different chapters of the same story across a TV show and a movie. They always told their own stories just happened to be in the same setting. Wandavision and Doctor Strange 2 are different parts of the same story, and not everyone is going to want to be forced to subscribe to Disney+. But the idea isn't strictly new is it? It's an evolved version of an existing idea. I doubt the series and movie tie-ins will be as crucial as some are making it out to be. If you bought the eight-issue Secret Invasion comic book series, you didn't need to buy the 48 tie-in issues that accompanied it. Your participation in tie-in issues was based on your affinity for the featured character(s). Conversely, if you weren't interested in the main series, and you saw your favorite book suddenly branded as a "Secret Invasion" tie-in for a month, it didn't amount to much more than a hiccup in following the series. The Disney+ series is an enticement; they're not going to be mandatory. If you're a devout follower and have the disposable income to pay for the extra content, it's there for you. If you're more casual or a pick-and-choose type of fan, then enjoy the theatrical releases and that experience. If you don't want to subscribe, but you still feel FOMO, I wouldn't know how to address that circumstance other than to wish you luck. Movies take a while to be produced and to be released. The process takes years. I don't think it's unreasonable of Disney to want to fill in that gap with additional optional content. It keeps fans, who mostly tent to be impatient, engaged. MCU Phase four is clearly moving away from the cohesive narrative through-lines that popularized early phases. I, personally, just don't see this as a BIG issue or a hanging offense. I didn't say it was a big issue or a hanging offense. I just said it's fine to question it, because it hasn't been put into practice yet. Marvel Studios has to drop the ball sooner or later. 11 years of home runs is amazing, but sooner or later, the good fortunes have to run out. So some healthy skepticism is good at this delicate stage.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 3:44:06 GMT 1
Is the model all that new? I watched Star Trek in theaters and on TV for years. I didn't feel a need to ignore the theatrical releases or TV shows. I liked it when the movies introduced a new uniform or a piece of tech that trickled down into the TV shows. In the case of Star Trek The Next Generation, the films were the add-value piece that you had to go out of your way and spend money to see. Disney+'s Marvel and Star Wars series is an evolution of an existing model. I keep framing it as just like the comics There are events, and there individual series. It’s all about reading/watching what you find important, not just thinking the films are most important because they’re types of things have mostly only been taken seriously on film. What they’re doing goes beyond preconceived notions that TV is some lesser cousin to the films. In my view, content is content, and all of the chatter surrounding the particular medium is just a circular debate. If Disney expanded the MCU story to flow through comic books or video games, I wouldn't discard the content in those channels as irrelevant because I choose not to engage in those mediums. I suspect that Disney+ Marvel content is a part of Disney's long-term contingency planning for when audience tastes inevitable change regarding CBMs. Eventually, we might see all Marvel live-action content move to Disney+. Subscription dollars provide a more regular and predictable revenue stream to produce content. Subscribers would get content first, and theatrical releases would follow for those not interested in a subscription.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 6:51:32 GMT 1
But the idea isn't strictly new is it? It's an evolved version of an existing idea. I doubt the series and movie tie-ins will be as crucial as some are making it out to be. If you bought the eight-issue Secret Invasion comic book series, you didn't need to buy the 48 tie-in issues that accompanied it. Your participation in tie-in issues was based on your affinity for the featured character(s). Conversely, if you weren't interested in the main series, and you saw your favorite book suddenly branded as a "Secret Invasion" tie-in for a month, it didn't amount to much more than a hiccup in following the series. The Disney+ series is an enticement; they're not going to be mandatory. If you're a devout follower and have the disposable income to pay for the extra content, it's there for you. If you're more casual or a pick-and-choose type of fan, then enjoy the theatrical releases and that experience. If you don't want to subscribe, but you still feel FOMO, I wouldn't know how to address that circumstance other than to wish you luck. Movies take a while to be produced and to be released. The process takes years. I don't think it's unreasonable of Disney to want to fill in that gap with additional optional content. It keeps fans, who mostly tent to be impatient, engaged. MCU Phase four is clearly moving away from the cohesive narrative through-lines that popularized early phases. I, personally, just don't see this as a BIG issue or a hanging offense. I didn't say it was a big issue or a hanging offense. I just said it's fine to question it, because it hasn't been put into practice yet. Marvel Studios has to drop the ball sooner or later. 11 years of home runs is amazing, but sooner or later, the good fortunes have to run out. So some healthy skepticism is good at this delicate stage. I'm okay with all forms of skepticism, healthy or otherwise. You never know, there might actually be something in the water. What I've seen and heard from Disney+ detractors goes far beyond "healthy skepticism." It's flat-out derision all because, let's be honest, the "bonus" content is behind a paywall. "Critics," think that because you have to pay for it every month, it's automatically bad. And hey, if you work half as hard as I do to earn your money, I can respect that. But that's a far cry from skepticism; it's an inherent bias. I don't really care what side of the argument anyone falls on, but I don't think Disney came this far with the MCU to suddenly shut out longtime, DEVOTED fans with a paywall streaming gimmick. Sounds a bit shortsighted for a company that is relentless in its long-term planning. Yes, we do need skepticism for sure, but I respectfully submit that it should be tempered by the Disney track record thus far and a pinch of critical thinking. I'm already subscribed to D+, so I'm happy to get on the mic and fill in anyone on anything they might have missed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2020 7:02:39 GMT 1
I didn't say it was a big issue or a hanging offense. I just said it's fine to question it, because it hasn't been put into practice yet. Marvel Studios has to drop the ball sooner or later. 11 years of home runs is amazing, but sooner or later, the good fortunes have to run out. So some healthy skepticism is good at this delicate stage. I'm okay with all forms of skepticism, healthy or otherwise. You never know, there might actually be something in the water. What I've seen and heard from Disney+ detractors goes far beyond "healthy skepticism." It's flat-out derision all because, let's be honest, the "bonus" content is behind a paywall. "Critics," think that because you have to pay for it every month, it's automatically bad. And hey, if you work half as hard as I do to earn your money, I can respect that. But that's a far cry from skepticism; it's an inherent bias. I don't really care what side of the argument anyone falls on, but I don't think Disney came this far with the MCU to suddenly shut out longtime, DEVOTED fans with a paywall streaming gimmick. Sounds a bit shortsighted for a company that is relentless in its long-term planning. Yes, we do need skepticism for sure, but I respectfully submit that it should be tempered by the Disney track record thus far and a pinch of critical thinking. I'm already subscribed to D+, so I'm happy to get on the mic and fill in anyone on anything they might have missed. I also think Disney/Marvel will pull this off alright. That said, I really wish they'd also put these on TV and give them DVD box sets. That way, they can never take them away from me.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Dec 25, 2020 7:12:12 GMT 1
I'm okay with all forms of skepticism, healthy or otherwise. You never know, there might actually be something in the water. What I've seen and heard from Disney+ detractors goes far beyond "healthy skepticism." It's flat-out derision all because, let's be honest, the "bonus" content is behind a paywall. "Critics," think that because you have to pay for it every month, it's automatically bad. And hey, if you work half as hard as I do to earn your money, I can respect that. But that's a far cry from skepticism; it's an inherent bias. I don't really care what side of the argument anyone falls on, but I don't think Disney came this far with the MCU to suddenly shut out longtime, DEVOTED fans with a paywall streaming gimmick. Sounds a bit shortsighted for a company that is relentless in its long-term planning. Yes, we do need skepticism for sure, but I respectfully submit that it should be tempered by the Disney track record thus far and a pinch of critical thinking. I'm already subscribed to D+, so I'm happy to get on the mic and fill in anyone on anything they might have missed. I also think Disney/Marvel will pull this off alright. That said, I really wish they'd also put these on TV and give them DVD box sets. That way, they can never take them away from me. I don't know... Maybe I'm crazy, but it feels like it's kind of hard to go wrong with more content, even if it is unfocused or "off topic." People. Like. Holiday. Specials. I'll gladly stick my right hand through a hole in a box with a King Cobra in it if the MCU fandom at large only prefers less content that takes longer to produce and involves risking your health to go see it. You're not wrong about giving media-collectors a shot at "owning" the material. And believe me, if Disney sees an ancillary revenue stream in it, those steel boxes will end up on shelves. All the extras, though, will likely be D+ exclusives. Yes, there are plenty of negatives to consider in Disney's streaming strategy, but I feel they are far outweighed by the benefits because they're geared towards modern consumer behavior. You have to skate to where the puck is going to be...
|
|
|
Post by AQUA KEN! on Dec 25, 2020 18:11:59 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Dec 30, 2020 22:57:29 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by AQUA KEN! on Jan 1, 2021 14:08:51 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2021 23:49:45 GMT 1
|
|